Page History

The At-Large Advisory Committee notes that:

• A Code of Conduct has been established as an essential part of the Rules of Procedure of the At-Large Advisory Committee;

• The Code of Conduct establishes a mechanism which properly allows the Chair of the ALAC to intervene to protect the health of debates and prevent misuse of public discussion fora by anyone – but that it does not provide a detailed sanctions regime.

Therefore, in order to provide the community as a whole with further details on how the Code of Conduct will be enforced, the ALAC decides as follows, swith respect to invocation of Rule 22.15 or 22.16:

• As a first step, the Chair shall post to the list in question as follows (“First Step Sanctions”):
  • notice that there is a violation of the Code of Conduct;
  • the portion or portions of Rule 22 which are being violated;
  • that those who are in breach are to immediately cease to breach the rule(s) or face moderation.
• If, according to the judgment of the Chair, the offending behaviour continues, the Chair shall post to the list in question as follows (“Second Step Sanctions”):
  • notice that there is a continuing violation of the Code of Conduct;
  • the portion or portions of Rule 22 which continue to being violated;
  • that the staff are therefore directed to enable moderation of the offending persons emails;
  • That The Staff are to allow up to the first three (3) emails per day from the offending person to be posted to the list.
  • The Staff shall confirm to the list in question the point at which the moderation has begun. Moderation shall not restrict the ability of those being moderated from reception of all list traffic.
• If, after a reasonable period of time – “reasonable” being determined by the Chair – the three postings which are allowed per day are deemed to be entirely, or largely, a continuing violation of the Code of Conduct, the Chair shall post to the list in question as follows (“Third Stage Sanctions”):
  • notice that there is a continuing violation of the Code of Conduct;
  • the portion or portions of Rule 22 which continue to being violated;
  • that the staff are therefore directed to enable moderation of the offending persons emails;
  • That all posting privileges for the offending poster are revoked for a period of one month.
  • The Staff shall confirm to the list in question the point at which posting privileges have been revoked. Moderation shall not restrict the ability of those being moderated from reception of all list traffic.
• After one month, posting privileges shall be enabled by the Staff in reverse order to the sanctions imposed. In other words, if second-stage sanctions were imposed, after one month, the address or addresses in question will be restored to unrestricted posting access. If third stage sanctions were imposed, then after one month the poster’s first three postings per day would be permitted, and one month from that date, if no Code of Conduct violations were engaged in by the poster in question, full access would be granted.

• Note that any dispute which those whom the Chair has notified under these provisions shall be taken to private email. Any posting by those whom the Chair has decided are in breach of Rule 22 that is posted to public mailing lists shall itself be considered a breach of the Code of Conduct.

• Note further that if the Chair has good reason to believe that a poster subject to Second Stage or Third Stage sanctions should be restored to partial, or full, posting privileges in less than a month after sanctions were imposed, the Chair is empowered to alter the sanctions accordingly.

Seems a bit complex - if the staff is moderating and the emails are entirely, or largely, a continuing violation of the Code of Conduct, should the staff post even 1 of them? If they are still posting inappropriate stuff, should we wait to increase sanctions?
Jacqueline (too much trouble to log in just to post this)

contributed by guest@socialtext.net on 2008-03-11 19:54:51 GMT